THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all. Please be seated. (Applause.)
Thanks for letting me come by. Tom, thanks for the invitation. What I
thought I would do is share some thoughts with you on some issues that
kind of like may be on the TV screen these days. (Laughter.) And then
answer some of your questions. I'm interested to know what's on your
mind.

First, I've had a fabulous trip to your unbelievably beautiful
state. It started off in northern California, Cisco; then I went to
Stanford; then I went to Napa Valley; then I rode my bicycle on Earth
Day in Napa Valley. Then I found out the mountains are a little steep
in Napa Valley. (Laughter.) I then went down and spent fantastic time
in Palm Springs. What an unbelievably diverse state and it's a
fantastic place to end my journey, here in Orange County. I want to
thank you for giving me a chance to come by and visit with you.

Laura sends her very best. I, of course, checked in with her this
morning before I headed over here to see if she had any additional
instructions for me for the day. (Laughter.) She said, keep it short.
(Laughter.) I'm a lucky man to have Laura as a wife. You can imagine
what it's like to be President -- there's some pressure on your family,
as you can imagine. The good news is I've got a 45-second commute.
(Laughter.) And the better news is I've got a wife who is a fantastic
First Lady who shares a passion with me to do the best we can for our
country. (Applause.)

I want to thank Lucy Dunn, as well as thanking Tom for putting this
event together. I appreciate the members of the Orange County Business
Council. I want to thank Congressman John Campbell for his service.
Appreciate you. He's the Congressman from this district, by the way.
And Catherine is with us. I thank -- Congresswoman Mary Bono is with us
today. Mary, thank you for being here. (Applause.) I just spent some
quality time in her district, and I forgot to tell you that I had the
privilege of riding my mountain bike in the desert, as well. The
national monument that she helped put together to preserve open spaces
-- she's got a lot of humility, she didn't name the national monument
after herself. If I were to name it I would say, Really Hard Bike Ride
Monument. (Laughter.)

I want to thank Congressman Ken Calvert for joining us today. Ken,
it's good to see you, proud of you. (Applause.) Congressman Gary
Miller is with us today. Congressman, thank you. (Applause.) Mayor
Beth Krom of the city of Irvine -- Madam Mayor, thank you for being
here. Thanks for serving. (Applause.) There you are, Mayor. Thank
you. (Applause.) Appreciate you coming. Thanks for serving. I had --
last night, by the way, I had dinner with the Mayor of Los Angeles and
Mayor of Long Beach and Mayor of Anaheim, and some other mayors that
came.

It's real important for the President to pay attention to people,
what's on their mind, and that's what I'm here to do today. I want to
share some things that's on my -- first of all, Rick Warren, by the way,
is here. Where are you, Rick? There you go. I appreciate you.
(Applause.) Still got the calendar in the desk. (Laughter.)
Ambassador Argyros, good to see you, George. George served our country
as the ambassador to Spain. Thank you. (Applause.)

I got a lot on my mind these days; I want to share two thoughts
with you. First, I want to talk about the war on terror. I wish I
could report to you that the war on terror was over. It's not. There
is still an enemy that wants to do us harm. And the most important job
of the President of the United States is to protect the American people
from that harm. That's -- and I think about it all the time.

As you know, well, I make a lot of decisions, and at the core of my
decision-making when it comes to protecting America is the lessons
learned from September the 11th, 2001. My job is to use the resources
of the United States to prevent such an attack from happening again.
And the first lesson of September the 11th, 2001 is that we face an
enemy that had no regard for innocent life, an enemy which has hijacked
a great religion to suit their political needs.

And therefore, the only way to deal with them is to stay on the
offense to pressure them, and to bring them to justice which is
precisely what the United States of America is doing and will continue
to do for the safety of the American people. (Applause.)

The second lesson is we must deny these folks safe haven. They
need to find safe haven from which to plot and plan. We denied safe
haven in Afghanistan, and we're denying them safe haven in Iraq.

One of the important things that a President must do is to take the
words of the enemy very seriously. And when the enemy speaks, and they
speak quite often, we listen carefully. We listen to their aims and
their objectives. These are not a kind of isolated, angry people.
These are folks bound together by an ideology that is totalitarian in
nature. They believe that capitalism produces weak societies. They
want to spread their idea of life throughout the Middle East. They have
stated so in word after word. And they believe that with time, they can
establish a safe haven in Iraq.

And here's the danger of having an enemy with a safe haven in Iraq,
Iraq has got wealth. Iraq has -- had weapons of mass destruction and
has the knowledge as to how to produce weapons of mass destruction. And
the confluence of a terrorist network with weapons of mass destruction
is the biggest threat the United States of America faces. They have
said it's just a matter of time.

And they've got a powerful weapon, by the way -- the enemy does.
And that is the willingness and capacity to kill innocent people. And
they understand the United States of America is a compassionate nation.
They view -- I'm sure they view it as a weakness of our country, I
happen to view it as a strength that we value every life, that every
person is precious. But they know, and it doesn't take much to realize
that when you put carnage on our TV screens, it causes us to weep. It
causes people rightly to say whether or not the cause is worth it. It's
a legitimate question for the American people.

But it's very important for the American people to understand that
they're trying to run us out of Iraq for a purpose. And the purpose is
to be able to have safe haven from which to launch further attacks. And
I understand it. And we've got a strategy in place to achieve victory.

Yesterday I went over to Twentynine Palms -- I want to tell you
something about the United States military. These young men and women
are incredibly dedicated. They are motivated. They understand that we
must defeat the enemy over there so we do not have to face them here at
home. Most of them raised their hand to volunteer after September the
11th. Many of them have said, I want to continue to serve our country.
We're lucky to have people like them willing to o serve. And the United
States government, whether you agree with my policy or not, must stand
by our troops. When they're in harm's way, they deserve the best pay,
the best equipment, and the best possible support. (Applause.)

And I told them, I told them they didn't have to worry about me. I
believe we're going to win in Iraq. And a victory in Iraq will be a
major blow to the totalitarian vision of bin Laden and his lieutenants
-- a major blow. One, it will be a tactical blow. We'll deny them that
which they want. But secondly, it will be a major blow because, in the
long-term, the best way to defeat an ideology of hatred is with an
ideology of hope.

I based a lot of my foreign policy decisions on some things that I
think are true. One, I believe there's an Almighty, and secondly, I
believe one of the great gifts of the Almighty is the desire in
everybody's soul, regardless of what you look like or where you live, to
be free. I believe liberty is universal. I believe people want to be
free. And I know that democracies do not war with each other. And I
know that the best way to defeat the enemy, the best way to defeat their
ability to exploit hopelessness and despair is to give people a chance
to live in a free society.

You know, the Iraqis went to the polls last December for the third
time in one year. It seems like a decade ago, doesn't it? It seems
like it was just an eternity ago that 12 million people defied
terrorists, threats, and said, we want to be free. We're sick and tired
of a society that had been suppressed by a brutal tyrant. We want to go
to the polls. We want to be self-governing. I wasn't surprised; I was
pleased, but not surprised. If you believe that liberty exists in the
soul of each person on the face of the Earth, it shouldn't surprise you
that, given the chance, people will say, we want to be free. And now
the role of the United States is to stand by the courageous Iraqis as
their democracy develops.

It's not easy work, by the way, to go from tyranny to democracy.
We had kind of a round go ourself, if you look back at our history. My
Secretary of State's relatives were enslaved in the United States even
though we had a Constitution that said all were -- that believed in the
dignity, or at least proclaimed to believe in the dignity of all. The
Articles of Confederation wasn't exactly a real smooth start for our
government to begin. And what you're watching on your TV screens is a
new democracy emerging. And I had the privilege of calling the
President of Iraq, the new Speaker of Iraq, and the Prime
Minister-designee of Iraq, there in the comfort of my hotel room in Palm
Desert -- Palm Springs. And I can't tell you how heartened I was to
hear their words.

First of all, they expressed great appreciation for the American
people, and our troops, and the families of our troops. Secondly, to a
person -- this is a Kurd, a Shia, and a Sunni I'm talking to -- each one
of them said, we want to have a national unity government. We're sick
of the sectarian violence. We believe if you stand with us, we can
achieve our objective of becoming a democracy that listens to the
people. And I believe them. And I believe them. And I told them -- I
said, look, it's going to be up to you to make it work, but you can
count on the United States of America because we believe in liberty and
the capacity of liberty to change lives and to change the neighborhood
for a more peaceful tomorrow.

This is a new chapter in our relationship. We had an important
milestone when the unity government was formed, and now there's a new
chapter in the relationship and we're moving forward.

You know, it's really important for people to be able to connect
the concept of freedom to our security. And it's hard. It's hard,
particularly in a day and age when every act of violence is put in your
living room. And I know that. I fully understand the challenge I face
as the Commander-in-Chief to describe to the American people why the
sacrifice is worth it.

And perhaps the best way to do so is to share one of my favorite
lessons of history with you, and that is that my relationship with Prime
Minister Koizumi of Japan is a special relationship. He's an
interesting guy. And he's a friend, and we work to keep the peace. We
sit down -- when we sit down, we talk about the importance of democracy
developing in Iraq. The Japanese had troops, by the way, in Iraq to
help this young country. We talked about North Korea. We talk about
issues of peace. I find it so interesting and so ironic that those are
the conversations I have with him, especially since 60 years ago, my dad
-- and I suspect many of your relatives -- fought the Japanese as an
enemy.

And so what happens between 18-year-old G.H.W. Bush, Navy fighter
pilot, signing up to fight the sworn enemy of Japanese, and his son
sitting down to talk about the peace? And what happened was Japan
adopted a Japanese-style democracy. Democracy can help change the world
and lay the foundation for peace. And that's what's happening today.
These are historic times. My job is to lead this to protect you. And
my job is to lay the foundation of peace for generations to come. And
that is why I told those Marines yesterday that we're going to complete
the mission. (Applause.)

I got a lot of others things to talk about. I want to talk about
immigration. So I saw my friend Brulte, he's an ex-politician, you
know? Always a friend. He said, people are wondering why you would
come to Orange County to talk about immigration. (Laughter.) And the
answer is because that's what a leader does.

I want to talk to you, tell you my thoughts about the subject.
First of all, I understand it is an emotional subject. And it's really
important that those of us who have microphones and can express
ourselves do so in a respectful way that recognizes we are a nation of
immigrants, that we have had a grand tradition in this country of
welcoming people into our society. And ours is a society that is able
to take the newly arrived, and they become equally American. I believe
that immigration has helped reinvigorate the soul of America. I know
that when somebody comes to our country because he or she has a dream
and is willing to work hard for that dream, it makes America a better
place.

Now, first and foremost, the federal government has the role to
enforce our border. The American people are right in saying to the
government, enforce the border. Listen, I was an old border governor.
I understand it's important to enforce our border. And we are. We got
a lot of good people down there working hard on the border to keep
people from -- and contraband, or whatever -- from coming into this
country illegally. We've increased the number of Border Patrol. And I
want to thank to Congresswoman and Congressmen here for being wise about
providing resources to increase the number of patrol on the border. But
that's not enough.

We've got to have modern equipment to be able to help people find
people that are coming across a very long and difficult border to
protect. We got infrared. Unmanned vehicles are being -- aerial
vehicles -- UAVs are being deployed. We're now beginning to modernize
our border so that the people we've asked to enforce the border have got
the tools necessary to do so. In parts of the rural border there needs
to be berms to prevent people from flying across in their SUVs,
smuggling people into America. And we're strengthening this border.
I'll tell you something that's interesting. Since 2001, 6 million
people have been caught illegally trying to get in this country, and
turned back -- 6 million people. So people are working down there, and
they're working hard.

And I'm going to continue to work with Congress. I know these
people from Congress are interested in providing the Border Patrol and
those responsible for enforcing the border the tools necessary to do
their job, and I thank you for that.

Secondly, we have got a problem with -- we have a problem we're
going to solve this year, by the way, of catching people from --
non-Mexican illegal immigrants, and just sending them back into society.
There weren't enough detention beds. So you got the people down there
working hard -- 6 million people crossing since 2001 and sent home. But
most of the Mexican citizens who were caught trying to illegally come in
the country were sent back to their country. But if you catch somebody
from Central America coming back, you just can't send them back for a
while, so there needs to be a place to detain them. We didn't have
enough bed space. And so we had catch-and-release. We're asking people
to go down there and do their job, and they find somebody from Central
America sneaking in and they say, check back in with us in 45 days, come
and see your immigration guy down there. (Laughter.) And they weren't
checking back in after 45 days. (Laughter.) They were coming to work,
see. They wanted to put food on the table for their families, and they
weren't interested in checking back in.

And so it meant there was a lot of wasted effort by the Border
Patrol. We're going to change that. One of the things that Congress
has done, it's done a good job of providing additional money for bed
space and money to make sure that we can send people back home. You got
people coming up who want to work, see. They're going broke at home;
they want to put food on the table; they go to unbelievable lengths to
come and feed their families. We're catching them, we're putting them
back in -- we're stopping that. Our job is to enforce this border -- 6
million people have been turned back. And we got a strategy in place to
make sure that this border is as tight as it possibly can be.

Secondly, in order to make sure immigration laws work, you got to
enforce the laws on the books, see. If it's illegal to hire somebody,
then the federal government has got to enforce those laws. We're a
nation of law. And by the way, you can be a nation of law and a
compassionate nation at the same time. You don't have to be --
(applause.)

Now, the problem we have is you got some person out there in
central Texas needing a worker, and he can't find a worker, an American.
So he says, look, anybody help me find somebody, I got something to do.
This economy is growing, see -- 4.7 unemployment rate nationwide.
Pretty good numbers. And people are having trouble finding work that
Americans won't do. And that's a fact of life. And so he says, why
don't you send somebody over to help me? And they show up and they put
a Social Security card out there and it looks real. You know, our small
business owners are not document checkers. These are people trying to
get ahead, and it's impossible to -- (applause.) It's impossible to
really effect the enforcement of our laws if people are able to use
forged documents.

Now, we've increased the amount of manpower there to hold people to
account for hiring illegals, but it is difficult to hold somebody, an
employer to account if they're putting false papers on -- the truth of
the matter is, what's happened is people are trying to come in this
country and we got smugglers smuggling them in. And they're putting
them in the back of 18-wheelers, stuffing human beings in the back of
trucks, because people are coming to do jobs Americans won't do.
They're putting people out in deserts. We've lost a lot of people, a
lot of decent, hardworking people, trying to come in this country in the
desert, losing their lives. These smugglers are coyotes, they're kind
of preying on innocent life, and they've got a whole document forgery
industry going on.

See, we made it such that an underground industry thrives on human
beings, people coming to do work that the Americans will not do. And so
I think that the best way to enforce our border and the best way,
besides making sure it's modern and we've got manpower and equipment
down there, which we do, and it's increasing every week, is to come up
with a rational plan that recognizes people coming here to work and let
them do so on a temporary basis. That's why I'm for a temporary worker
program that will -- (applause) -- that says to a person, here is a
tamper-proof card that says, you can come and do a job an American won't
do, fill a need. A tamper-proof card all of a sudden makes interior
enforcement work. In other words, we now know who's getting the cards
and we know they can't be tampered with. So the guy says, show me your
tamper-proof card before I hire you. And if they do, fine. But if they
don't, say, I'm not hiring you. You got to have the card to get work.

Secondly, we got a lot of people across the border to do jobs. It
is really hard to enforce the border with people sneaking across to do a
job. Doesn't it make sense to have a rational, temporary worker plan
that says you don't need to sneak across the border. You can come on a
temporary basis to do a job Americans won't do. So you don't have to
sneak across -- so you don't have to pay money to a coyote that stuffs
you in the back of a truck, so you don't have to burden our borders.

Look, we want our Border Patrol hunting gun smugglers and dope
runners. And it just seems rational to me and logical to me that says,
okay, fine, you can come and do a job Americans won't do for a temporary
period of time with a tamper-proof card.

All of a sudden, we've kind of taken this smuggling industry and
dismantled it through rational policy. All of a sudden, we recognized
that we want to treat people with respect. I know this an emotional
debate. And I can understand it's emotional. But one thing we cannot
lose sight of is that we're talking about human beings, decent human
beings that need to be treated with respect. (Applause.)

Massive deportation of the people here is unrealistic. It's just
not going to work. You can hear people out there hollering it's going
to work. It's not going to work. It just -- and so therefore, what do
we do with people who are here? And this is one of the really important
questions Congress is going to have to deal with.

I thought the Senate had an interesting approach by saying that if
you've been here for five years or less, you're treated one way, and
five years or more, you're treated another. It's just an interesting
concept that people need to think through about what to do with people
that have been here for quite a period of time.

Now, my attitude is this: I think that people ought to be,
obviously, here to work on a temporary basis. The definition of
temporary will be decided in the halls of Congress.

Secondly, I believe that a person should never be granted automatic
citizenship. And let me tell you why I believe that, that if you've
been here -- broken the law and have been here working, that it doesn't
seem fair to me to say you're automatically a citizen when somebody who
has been here legally working is standing in line trying to become a
citizen, as well. In other words, there's the line for people.
(Applause.)

But what I do think makes sense is that a person ought to be
allowed to get in line. In other words, pay a penalty for being here
illegally, commit him or herself to learn English, which is part of the
American system -- (applause) -- and get in the back of the line. In
other words, there is a -- there is a line of people waiting to become
legal through the green card process. And it's by nationality. And if
you're a citizen here who has been here illegally, you pay a penalty,
you learn English, and you get in line, but at the back -- not the
front. And if Congress wants a shorter line for a particular
nationality, they increase the number of green cards. If they want a
longer line, they shrink the number of green cards per nationality.

This is an important debate for the American citizens to conduct.
It's a debate that requires clear rational thought, and it's really
important for those of us in positions of responsibility to remember
that we're a nation of law, a welcoming nation, a nation that honors
people's traditions no matter where they're from because we've got
confidence in the capacity of our nation to make us all Americans, one
nation under God.

And so that's what's on my mind today -- got a lot of other things,
if you're interested. But I -- (applause) -- I got some time for some
-- I'd like to answer some questions if you got any, or hear from you.

Q I understand you get a lot of tough questions and you're very
candid person, so assuming that you agree with the fact that no one is
perfect --

THE PRESIDENT: I agree with that.

Q Good.

THE PRESIDENT: Especially me. (Laughter.)

Q I'd like to get your candid response to your perspective from
the outside looking in, and now the inside looking out. Before you
became President, obviously, you had some perceptions based on your
family history, being governor, what it would be like to be President of
the U.S. Now that you are President, and you've had a chance to go
through the experience and you're in your second term, candidly, if you
had it to do over, would there be anything that you'd do differently?

THE PRESIDENT: I appreciate it. The fundamental question

-- the threshold question is would I run, the first place. That's
really the first question that one would ask. Now that I'm here, seeing
what it's like, would I do it again, and the answer is, absolutely.

I have enjoyed this experience in a way that's hard for me to
describe to you. Listen, there have been some rough moments. But it is
an incredible honor to serve our country.

The second threshold question is, would I commit troops to protect
the American people. It's really a fundamental question. Knowing what
I know today, would I have done anything differently with our troops.

First, you got to know that the hardest decision for a President is
to put anybody in harm's way -- because I fully understand the
consequences of making such a decision. I was at church yesterday in
Twentynine Palms. In the pew that I was sitting in was a mother and
step-father grieving for a guy who lost his life. And I knew that I
would have to deal with this as best as I possibly can.

I also wanted to let you know that it's before you commit troops
that you must do everything you can to solve the problem diplomatically.
And I can look you in the eye and tell you I feel I've tried to solve
the problem diplomatically to the max, and would have committed troops
both in Afghanistan and Iraq knowing what I know today. (Applause.)

Obviously, as we look back -- and every war plan is perfect until
it meets the enemy. It's fine on paper until you actually start putting
it into practice. And there is a -- decisions like preparing an Iraqi
army for a -- external threat. Well, it turns out, there may have been
an external threat, but it's nothing compared to the internal threat.
We got in and started trying to build some big reconstruction projects
right off the bat. And it didn't make any sense because it was easy --
they became convenient targets for the enemy. And so we started to
decentralize -- this kind of -- I'm getting down to the minutia. But
there are some tactics that -- when I look back -- that we could have
done differently.

The fundamental question on the Iraq theater, though, is did we put
enough troops in there in the first place. That's the debate in
Washington. I'm sure you've heard about it. Let me just tell you what
happened. I called Tommy Franks in with Don Rumsfeld and said, Tommy,
if we're going in, you design the plan and you got what you need. I
said -- I remember the era when politicians were trying to run wars,
people trying to fine-tune this or fine-tune that. One the lessons of
Vietnam, it seemed like to me -- still does -- is that people tried to
make decisions on behalf of the military, which I think is a terrible
precedent to make if you're the Commander-in-Chief. By the way, you
can't run a war, you can't make decisions based upon polls and focus
groups, either.

And so I told Tommy, I said, you know you got what you need. And
then it's my -- then the fundamental question is, do I think he's
comfortable telling the Commander-in-Chief what's real and isn't real.
So I spent a lot of time with Tommy, and the first time I'm with him I'm
trying to figure out whether or not he has got the ability to walk in
the Oval Office -- which can be kind of an intimidating place -- and
say, here's what I think, Mr. President.

I was comforted by the fact that Tommy and I were raised in the
same part of the world. He went to Midland Lee High School with Laura,
by the way. I felt like -- I felt like that there was kind of a kinship
to begin with, and I'm confident, sir, that Tommy told me exactly what
was on his mind. I believe that. And so, therefore, the troop level
that he suggested was the troop level necessary to do the job. And I
support it strongly.

And I fully understand people are going to think back and, could
you have done something different, or not different. And that's fair.
And it's worthwhile. And we still have members of Congress who are
coming in -- and they should -- are coming in and say, Mr. President,
have you thought about this, or are you going to do that. And we're
constantly adjusting on the ground to meet an enemy which changes. But
on the big decisions of sending the troops in, I'd have done it again.

Thank you. Great question. (Applause.)

Yes, sir.

Q Good morning. My name is Jamie Law (sp) and I'm 14 years old,
and I was wondering what America is going to be like in 10 years.
(Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: Here's what America needs to be like -- maybe 20 --
(laughter) -- 10 to 20. You need to be driving an automobile with
hydrogen as the main source of power. (Applause.) And at the very
least, with a hybrid -- a plug-in battery of a hybrid vehicle that will
let you get the first 40 miles without using gasoline. In other words,
between 10 to 20 years from now we got to get off Middle Eastern oil.
It's a problem. (Applause.)

You'll be able to see a technology, a technology that will be --
enable you to converse with somebody on long distance and it seems like
the person is right there in the room with you. I saw that at Cisco.
It's an amazing technology that will mean that education changes to the
better. You can hire -- if you got yourself a state like we got in
Texas, that's rural, you can get a chemistry professor from one of the
urban centers and put them on the screen and it's like the professor is
right in the room, teaching. There's a way to husband resources.

You'll have the capacity to interface with people around the world
in a real-time basis. You'll be able to talk more clearly. Information
will become even more powerful than it is today. And the fundamental
question is, what do we do with that information. You'll be confronted
with very difficult choices when it comes to science. The first choice
we all have to deal with right off the bat is whether or not it's okay
to destroy life to save life. In other words, as technology progresses,
as this country of ours is more technologically advanced, you're going
to be confronted with serious ethical choices. There will be a clash
between morality and science that will present some really difficult
decisions for people.

You'll be able to have a leader that can go and sit down with a
duly-elected leader of a major Middle Eastern country, saying, how can
we keep the peace together. I believe you'll see there's a democracy
movement moving across the Middle East over the next 10 years. Much of
it is going to be led by women who don't want to be a second-class
citizen in any society. I think you'll see a relationship between the
United States and other great powers that will enable us to work
together to be able to provide a stable platform.

What I hope you don't see is a nation that loses its nerve and
becomes isolationist and protectionist. That's one of my concerns, so I
put it in the State of the Union. It was such a concern that, instead
of going with, here are the 29 things we're going to do either for you
or to you, it was -- (laughter) -- I talked about isolation and
protectionism. It's very important for this nation to be a confident
nation and to remain a leader of the world. You cannot win the war on
terror if you kind of pull back and say, let somebody else deal with it.

You can't do your duty as a nation that should subscribe to the
theory that to whom much is given, much is required -- and that duty is
to help deal with HIV/AIDS, for example, on the continent of Africa. We
have a duty to help feed the hungry, in my judgment. (Applause.)

What I hope you don't see is a nation that loses its confidence in
the capacity to trade with countries like China. Hu Jintao was -- came
to visit, and we had a wonderful visit with him. But I know there are
some Americans who wonder whether or not it's worth the effort to try to
out-compete with China. They look at the statistics and they worry
about whether or not it is possible to compete with China. I say, you
bet it's possible to compete with China. And not only can we compete
with China, if we have a level playing field we'll do just fine.

And so what I'm telling you is I hope you have a nation that, at
home is one that is able to balance technology and ethical concerns, a
nation, by the way -- I hope those taxes remain low, see. One of the
things you got to make sure -- (applause) -- you got to have that proper
balance between what government really needs and money in your pocket.

Anyway -- great question, by the way, for a 14-year-old guy. I'm
not so sure if I were 14 I'd have been able to get that question out. I
might have been a little nervous. (Laughter.)

Let's see -- yes, ma'am.

Q First of all, I want to thank you for coming to Orange County.
I don't know who said it wasn't a good idea, but I think it's a great
idea. And we love you, so thank for being here. (Applause.) I very
much support your immigration plan. I think it's a good framework. But
the one question I have -- last year my daughter fell and broke her hip
-- she's 12. And it was five hours in the emergency room at the
hospital before she could see a doctor. And a lot of people in the ER
were there because it was their primary medical facility --

THE PRESIDENT: Correct.

Q So in your plan, how do you plan to address health care and
schools and so forth that are really impacted?

THE PRESIDENT: Community health centers. We -- this
administration, working with the Congress, has funded the expansion of
what's called community health centers. Community health centers are
places for the poor and the indigent to get primary care so to do
exactly what -- to address the problem that you described, which is
primary care in emergency rooms are costly, they are -- it's not a
cost-effective treatment -- I guess it is once you get the treatment,
but it's not cost-effective overall and, therefore, the advent of
community health centers.

And I don't know if you've got them here in Orange County; I hope
you do. I bet you do. You don't have any? Well, get to working,
Congressman. (Laughter and applause.) But that's the best way, really,
to be able to address the issue, whether it be for an immigrant who is
here, or anybody else that cannot afford health care. The best place to
get primary care is not the emergency rooms. And so we've got a
comprehensive strategy. And we're expanding them all across the
country. And I'm surprised you don't have one here. I bet you do, and
you just don't know it. And, therefore, what needs to happen is there
needs to be a campaign to explain what's available for people so that
they don't go to the emergency rooms.

Yes, sir.

Q Mr. President, I emigrated from Cuba when I was about nine
years old -- legally, I might add.

THE PRESIDENT: Pedro Pan? Were you Pedro Pan?

Q No.

THE PRESIDENT: No? Okay.

Q But anyway, besides marrying a wonderful woman and having two
great sons, coming to this great land is the best thing that has ever
happened to me. And I appreciate your comments on immigration. And my
question to you, Mr. President, is that I would like to go to Cuba, to
travel, to see -- I want to go see my front door that was bullet-riddled
when they were fighting Batista's guys. And I can't go there legally.
And I don't understand, how can we trade with Vietnam -- we lost over
50,000 Americans there -- how can we trade with Communist China, we
can't even go to Cuba? And I think if the borders were opened up with
Cuba and American enterprise got to go down there, I think Castro would
fall like a rock off a cliff. And my question to you, sir, is why can't
we open --

THE PRESIDENT: Okay, here's why --

Q Yes. (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: Here's why: Fidel Castro has got the capacity to
arbitrage your dollars to the advantage of his administration. You pay
in dollars, he pays in Cuban money and collects the difference. So you
go to a hotel in Havana, the money goes to the hotel, which has kind of
got a deal with the government in order to be there in the first place,
and the workers get paid in a currency that's worthless compared to the
U.S. dollar. And he makes the balance. And so, in all due respect, I
have taken the position that trade with the country enables a tyrant to
stay in power, as opposed to the opposite. Honest disagreement of
opinion -- I fully recognize -- but that's why I made the decision I
made. And anyway, my preacher, by the way, at St. John the Divine
Church, is a guy who came from Cuba at about the same age you did. You
look a little younger than he is -- but, nevertheless, that's why.
That's why.

Yes, sir.

Q As you said, you make a lot of important decisions on a
day-by-day basis. I'm interested in the personal, as well as political
aspects of your counsel. Do you know any illegal status individuals
coming from Midland, Texas? What do they feel? And how do they counsel
you on this? And also, politically, it's an intensely state-specific
issue. Are the states most affected by illegal immigration, speaking in
a collective voice?

THE PRESIDENT: Really good question. No, I don't believe I know
anybody who is in Texas illegally. Had I hired somebody who had been
here illegally, I guarantee you'd have read about it. (Laughter and
applause.)

Isn't that right, Elisabeth?

The interesting thing about this issue -- I want to be respectful
in correcting you about the nature of the immigration debate -- it is
more widespread than you think. It really is. There's a lot of states
who have been affected, and maybe impacted in a much more different way
than California and Texas has been. Texas and California are -- have
had a history of Latino presence. It's been a part of our heritage.
But there are many communities in the United States that for the first
time are getting to become acquainted with the Latino heritage. And
that probably impacts people even more significantly than parts of
California and Texas. It really does. And so there is a universal
concern about the issue. And what's really important about this issue
is to try to set aside all the emotion and think about how to solve the
problem in a rational, calm way.

But, no, it's -- people -- obviously, if you're from -- I was
talking to a congressman from -- I don't want to -- they'll start trying
to find the guy, so I'm not going to give him any hints, but --
(laughter.) It's a guy. Anyway, but he said, my town was like a small
number of minorities, and now it's 50 percent Latino, and we don't know
what to do. And this is a new phenomenon. This isn't something that's
been around for decades. This is a brand-new phenomenon. And so there
is a national concern about this issue. It really is. And, obviously,
it takes -- it reflects the nature of the local community, flares up one
way or another around the country. But there's a lot of people talking
about it. And it's -- we've got to get something done. I want a
comprehensive bill. I don't want -- (applause.)

Yes, sir, back there in the end zone.

Q Mr. President, Bill Habermehl, County Superintendent of
Schools. For us to compete globally, we need to get better in math and
science. What do you see as the role of the federal government in that
regard?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, thanks. First, the role of the federal
government is to make sure that we get it right at the early grades.
And that's why I worked hard for and was extremely proud to sign the No
Child Left Behind Act. And the No Child Left Behind Act starts with
these basic premises: One, children can learn, and we ought to expect
them to learn. I know that sounds simple. But that's not the way it
was in certain school districts. You look like a vet, and you know full
well that in certain school districts, just move them through, man.
What mattered was the age, not what -- the level of knowledge.

Secondly, that accountability can be used effectively, particularly
if it's designed at the local level. In other words, you can use an
accountability system to determine whether or not curriculum is working,
or you can use an accountability system to determine how your school
district is doing relative to the school district next-door to you. You
can use an accountability system to determine whether or not we're
closing an achievement gap that needs to be closed if America is going
to be a promising place for all people, not just some, but all people.

And so I worked with both Republicans and Democrats -- it actually
can happen sometimes in Washington that we're able to work together --
and passed the No Child Left Behind Act, which said, in return for
federal money -- in increasing amounts, by the way -- on particularly
Title I money, we expect you just to show us. We expect you to measure.
You notice I didn't say, we expect you to administer the test we
designed. I'm a local-control-of-schools person, and I knew that if a
federal test were designed, it could force people to behave according to
the tests. In other words, you could cause people to lose their
independence if you're the test designer. And so I said, California,
design your own test, and measure 3 through 8 and post the results for
everybody to see so that concerned citizens, when they saw a failure,
would have something to say to the -- to you to change. Or, thank you
for doing what you're doing.

And as a result of measuring, I can report to you that math scores
and science scores for 4th graders and reading scores

-- math and reading scores for 4th graders and 8th graders -- on the
rise, particularly amongst African American and Latino students.

Things are changing. It's amazing what happens when you say,
there's accountability in the system. The problem is, as you know full
well, but others may not, is that when a child gets to high school, our
math and science skills, relative to other countries in the world, is
abysmal. And it's not right. And we're not going to be able to compete
successfully for the jobs of the 21st century. So here's the strategy:
Apply the same rigor in math that we've applied in reading.

And here's what happens: In early grades in reading, if you don't
pass the test, there is supplemental service money to enable a child to
get up to speed. In other words, we diagnose the problem and we're
actually providing money to solve the problem, and it's paying off.
They ought to apply the same rigor to 8th grade math and 9th grade math
-- measure to find deficiencies and provide extra money for school
districts to make sure children get back up to speed.

Secondly, it is very important for there to be role models in
classrooms that basically says science and math are cool. They weren't
too cool when I was going to school, you know. And therefore, one of
the things we can do is have adjunct professors in classrooms. I went
to a school with Margaret Spellings, who is the Secretary of Education,
in Maryland the other day, and there were two NASA scientists there.
And part of their job was not only to work at the NASA facility
close-by, but to go into classrooms, to say to children, math and
science are really important for you.

Thirdly, AP works -- advanced placement. I bet you've got some
good AP teachers. The advanced placement program is the way to set high
standards for our children. And so, therefore, the federal government
ought to help train 70,000 AP teachers in classrooms. That says, we
believe in setting high standards; we ought not to accept a system that
doesn't continue to raise the bar and measure and hold people to
account.

Finally, we've got an additional 1 million students on Pell grants.
These are grants to help people who can't afford college go to college.
And they're very important -- it's a very important tool to help people
realize dreams. But I think we ought to enhance the Pell grants for
those who take rigorous academics in high school for years one and two.
And if you maintain a 3.0 grade point average and take science, math, or
critical languages in third and fourth year of college, you ought to get
an additional $4,000 on top of your Pell grant.

There is a strategy; the strategy of the federal government is a
part of the strategy. The local school district is an integral part of
the strategy. Thanks for being a superintendent, appreciate it.
(Applause.)

Yes, sir.

Q I'm a civil engineer, and we recently put out a report card
for the nation's infrastructure and -- by the American Society of Civil
Engineers. It was abysmal, is the word that you've used. And we're
really concerned that our nation is coming to a crisis on its
infrastructure. And yet, we seem to have problems with the federal
government coming up with the funds that we need for the various parts
of our transportation and our water resources.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I appreciate that very much. We passed a
pretty good sized highway bill -- like really big. And it's a six-year
bill, and so it's -- we've got five more years to run on it. But it was
a pretty interesting struggle about how much to spend and how much not
to spend. And I think if you look at the history of that highway bill,
pretty much the bill I signed was more than some thought was necessary.

I did talk to your Governor about an important subject, and that's
the levees. And I appreciated his time the other day when I was in --
up there in Cisco Systems. And we talked about the levees, and I said,
we want to help. He's committed, by the way, to rebuilding the
infrastructure of California. It's a good, strong commitment. And it's
what governors do, they lead. But he said, look, we need to work
together on this, and what he wanted -- what his office suggested is
that we allow the state of California to use the Corps of Engineers to
pay the federal share of levee rebuilding when the water goes down, and
then through the budget process, reimburse the state of California. I
agreed to that.

In other words, the Governor is concerned about being able to get
started enough on -- quick enough on levee repairs so we don't waste
time. And part of the concern is there's a sharing arrangement between
the federal government and the state government. And so I said, advance
the state share -- advance the federal share through state money and
we'll reimburse you. That's an important beginning. In other words,
the funding match is not an excuse. And secondly, he needs regulatory
relief from federal law and state law, in order to be able to take
advantage of the dry season to get the levees done. And so we're
working with him on that.

And -- but, no, I appreciate your concern. It's -- infrastructure
is always a difficult issue. It's a federal responsibility and a state
and local responsibility. And I, frankly, feel like we've upheld our
responsibility at the federal level with the highway bill. There are
other infrastructures we got to get built. We need a broadband highway
all across America if we're going to end up being a competitive nation.
I talked about the ability to be able to converse in real-time, speedy
and very fast ways. But that requires us to make sure that broadband is
effectively distributed all across the country -- not just in big
cities, but out in rural America, as well. And we're working hard on
right-of-way issues and other issues to get broadband extensively spread
throughout the country.

Yes, sir.

Q Mr. President, I want to thank you for being here in Orange
County. In your first term you came to Santa Ana, if you'll recall --

THE PRESIDENT: Yes.

Q -- you met with the museum -- it was a wonderful chat we had
with several of the leadership. Your honor, I -- don't call you "your
honor" already -- (laughter.) We believe, as you know, the Latino
community is America.

THE PRESIDENT: Por cierto.

Q Por cierto. And we believe that the effort that you're
putting forth as a comprehensive legislation is what we need in this
country. We believe that the economy is going to be great. We believe
that the issue that has been raised about the possible changes and
possible funding for many infrastructures, as well as emergency services
will be there, because we're going to make these people to pay taxes,
just like you and I. So we thank you for that.

We just want to ask you a question. What is it that we need to do,
and you need to do to make sure Congress will pass this comprehensive
immigration bill?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, that's starting right here. You know, you've
been on vacation and now start to work the issue. And one way to work
it, stand right here in front of these cameras in California, talking
about it in a candid way. And I'm going to do my part to continue to
call this nation to responsible dialogue and remind the United States
Congress we need to get a comprehensive bill passed.

The state of play right now is the Senate reached an important
compromise, and it was -- they had a chance to get a bill, it just got
caught up in, in my judgment, needless politics. One of the problems we
face in Washington is we've got too much needless politics. We got
people who aren't willing to -- they want to play -- they want to make
the other person look bad, as opposed to make the country look good.
And I'm going to continue to call people, whether it be on Social
Security reform, or immigration reform, to think about the country
first, and put our political parties aside. And I'm confident, if we
can do that, we'll come up with a rational plan that will make the
country proud.

I'd like to stay here all day, but I got to go to Vegas.
(Laughter.) Something about what goes on there, stays there -- or
something like that. (Applause.) God bless you. Thanks for letting me
come. (Applause.)